Case Digest (G.R. No. 124392)
Facts:
In People of the Philippines v. Federico Abrazaldo @ Peding, G.R. No. 124392, promulgated February 07, 2003, the Supreme Court En Banc (Sandoval‑Gutierrez, J., writing for the Court) reviewed on automatic appeal the November 15, 1995 Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 44, Dagupan City (Judge Crispin C. Laron) in Criminal Case No. 95‑01052‑D. The trial court had convicted accused‑appellant Federico Abrazaldo of murder under Art. 248, Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 7659, sentenced him to death, and ordered payment of indemnity and actual damages to the heirs of the deceased, Delfin Guban.The Information, filed August 3, 1995, charged that on July 15, 1995 at Barangay Pogo, Mangaldan, Pangasinan, accused, armed with a bolo, with intent to kill, by treachery and evident premeditation, stabbed Delfin Guban causing his death. At arraignment accused pleaded not guilty. Prosecution witnesses included Rosendo Fajardo (barangay tanod), SPO1 Ramie Petrache, SPO2 Roberto Fernandez, Dr. Alberto Gonzales (medical officer), and Gregorio Guban (victim’s father). The defense presented accused and his sister, Marites Abrazaldo.
According to the prosecution, at about 10:00 p.m. an intoxicated accused had earlier attempted to hack his uncle and sustained a forehead wound; barangay tanod members (including the victim) responded; a confrontation ensued in a well‑lit area, accused and victim grappled, accused pulled a knife and stabbed Guban in the abdomen, then fled; Guban told rescuers he was stabbed by “Feding Abrazaldo,” was operated on but died; a medico‑legal certificate cited stab wound with massive hemothorax. The knife was allegedly recovered the next day at the house of accused’s aunt.
Accused testified to a self‑defense theory: Guban, drunk and threatening, attacked him with an iron pipe and later grappling for a knife resulted in an accidental stabbing of Guban; accused claimed he intended to surrender the knife. His sister Marites contradicted this account, testifying that accused had been drinking, caused trouble, attempted to hack their uncle, suffered his forehead wound by bumping an artesian well, and nonetheless killed Guban.
The trial court found treachery and the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and that the crime occurred wher...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in rejecting accused‑appellant’s claim of self‑defense?
- Was the recovery of the alleged weapon at the aunt’s house properly held to bolster the prosecution’s case?
- Did the trial court err in its appraisal of the testimony of defense witness Marites Abrazaldo?
- Was treachery proven so as to elevate the killing to murder under Art. 248, Revised Penal Code?
- Was the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity established?
- Was the aggravating circumstance that the victim was a public authority engaged in the discharge of duties established?
- Were the trial c...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)